Thanks for the reply on this. I was surprised to learn about this - it
reminds me of the 64K limit on Intel 8086 memory blocks, but that's
just nostalgia speaking. Considering how few people this impacts, I'm
not planning to take any action. -Frank
On Thursday, November 6, 2003, at 04:45 PM, Jim Adrig wrote:
> We have run into this problem also and have found ways of working
> around it. Of course that is a huge single method for normal coding,
> but we have an automated system that takes separate scripts (for
> fields of a printed page) and combines them into a single method for
> each page.
> Part of our solution was to shorten the 'standard' method names that
> are written to the script which wrap the user's scripts; since this
> worked, I assume the problem is in the size of the source code for
> each script ?
> But a user could still go over the limit with careless or extemely
> complex coding.
> - Jim
> On Nov 6, 2003, at 2:20 PM, Frank Cohen wrote:
>> A TestMaker user posted this to our support email list regarding
>> Jython having an upper limit of 64K on any given method. I was
>> wondering if this is true? -Frank
>> From: PitoniakM@...
>> Date: Sat Nov 1, 2003 12:54:22 PM US/Pacific
>> To: dev@...
>> Subject: [Dev] Work around for Maximum Size of Data in a method < 64K
>> Reply-To: Load and TestMaker Developers List
>> I went to run a rather large script the other day and ran into a
>> problem. It apperas that JPython (an i believe java) has a limit of
>> 64k of data in any given method, and throws an exception if it is
>> passed. I had a rather large hashtable, and ran into this. Anone else
>> seen/dalt with this? Wonder if hashtables are less efficient than
>> other storgage mechanisms.
>> many thanks,
Frank Cohen, PushToTest, http://www.PushToTest.com, phone: 408 374 7426
Free open-source test automation solutions that test and monitor
applications, especially Web Services, for scalability and reliability.